wavefunction

I see two issues/potential strategies with Facebook.

1) Facbook could be broken apart from Instagram and WhatsApp.

2) Mark Zuckerberg is not beholden even to shareholders due to the rights of the shares he owns. Restructure the companies so he still owns the same % of the companies but has the same voting rights as any other shareholder.

Mark's definitely on his own augmented reality. Unfortunately the rest of us get to enjoy the Coriolis effects of it via his monetization of dishonesty.

>SF's budget is bigger than many countries

Those countries being under-developed African or Central Asian republics along with the various island nation-states. Right around Zimbabwe level.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nomi...

I cried in public one time while discussing my dead brother with my mom. It was a foreign country as well so who knows what people were thinking. Would do it again!

>whole "Russian disinformation"

That depends on how you define "whole." There must be examples of people either unknowingly and wrongly invoking "Russian disinformation" or intentionally invoking it for whatever purposes but there is definitely actual "Russian disinformation" occurring. Disinformation from all sorts of sources. It's imperative to be discerning now, and to be discerning about how to be discerning.

Steampunk seems to be misapplied everywhere these days.

Blade Runner's architectural aesthetics are art deco and brutalism.

Versailles was interesting to visit but after a while all that intricate detail became exhausting, which is perhaps why the gardens surrounding the place are such a needed relief. Great for impressing nobles who visit infrequently, but tedious to live in I must imagine even if just for the summer months.

>retype username

That's even worse than the non-sso sign in flow. It definitely doesn't have to be that bad.

>dent of genius

Sorry, the pedant in me (well, me) must point out it's "dint."

I was making an admittedly content-free "wry comment." I agree with you completely!

11% may even seem like a small number until you consider that not all the black men who have been incarcerated at least once in their life are currently incarcerated. 25% of black and hispanic men will face incarceration at least once in their life[0]. The incarceration is also skewed towards younger men who are one supposes potentially more likely to miss out on the formative years of their children's lives. It's also difficult for a strong family to develop in this situation imo. Life is about getting a good start and keeping that momentum going as steadily and predictably as possible.

[0]https://bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/Llgsfp.pdf

Where in the logic loop are we?

from the article

>plied with alcohol

contracts might not matter

I support the rights of NAZIs or others to express themselves within the law. I don't believe that facebook should be compelled to carry their speech without being compelled to carry all legal speech.

Finally, I will say I don't believe facebook or others should be compelled to carry all legal speech.

>people on mainstream platforms don't all know about or agree with those platform's moderation/censorship policies.

I will agree with you on this. I think the moderation policies should be clearly delineated or they don't really exist. A law is not much of a law if it's unequally applied.

You bring up an interesting point about "discovery" of view points you want to hear about, especially when you consider the foundation of the Internet as a platform: search engines. One problematic example I can think of off the top of my head is the "anti-vaxx" movement, which may be promoting a message that some people want to hear but at what cost to their children or the larger society who are subject to those parents' whims or beliefs? Very different than me discovering there are other people out there on the internet who are disturbed by the Garfield comic and want to joke about the existential horror of a cartoon cat and his owner.

I can't say that I have an easy answer for the issue of the harmful effects of a platform on the societies its users are members of. Or even determining what is harmful (or not).

I think if a platform like twitter or facebook have become a "utility" or indispensable to society then they should be heavily regulated and fall under society's control. I replied elsewhere that I am not sure I agree that these platforms have achieved indispensability but leaving that aside if they are integral to society then society should control them.

>you could argue that these american companies have a duty to follow the "spirit of free speech" in our country even if they aren't legally bound to it

I could not personally argue this in any shape way or form because I don't even know what to base this claim on. Free speech has been restricted historically (often during war-time but also for various populations of people.) It has been restricted for pragmatic reasons (like perjury).

I don't believe that anyone is guaranteed an audience for their free expression. I don't believe I'm disregarding anything?

>integral parts of society

I am not sure I agree with these companies being an integral part of society. I feel pretty confident they could be replaced by alternatives operated by other people and most if not all users would not notice the difference. But I've seen that happen with the early WWW with Altavista, Yahoo, etc.

And if they are an integral part of society then I think they should be heavily regulated for things like foreign and domestic propaganda and the promotion of dangerous falsehoods. It's either self-regulation (within legal reason) and whatever they decide is appropriate for their platforms, or they should be heavily regulated with guaranteed free expression as allowed by law.

I don't agree with doxxing or getting people fired. I am fine with facebook/twitter/etc. de-ranking/suspending/hiding/whatever a candidate who has called for their breakup, even though I support their breakup.

>private companies engaging in evaluating what's permissible speech and not

I don't feel this is an issue until you can't spin up your own website/app/platform and allow whatever speech you want. I am interested for any responses as to why I might be mistaken from people who disagree with me, though.

I downvoted your for "liberal ideals" when the rest of your post reads like a flimsy cliche of a "non-liberal."

Just an aside, neither the logo nor the name make me think of "spee." Definitely going to check this out though, thanks!

Isn't gcp going away in two years? Or at least speculated to given the leak about winding it down if they can't beat AWS and Azure for market share?

This seems like it will lead to more CIA arming of militant groups which according to your post means likely more enemy militant groups. I'd liken this to giving police officers tasers or firearms: instead of having to consider de-escalating situations, they can just shoot or tase someone instead.

I would prefer my government be forced to carefully consider whether giving any group weapons rather than "oh yeah totally cool we've got ways to shut them down if they turn on us."

People will spontaneously form "community" with what is available to them, whether this is the dog park or hanging and slangin on the street corner. Far more repulsive is a society that promotes nihilistic anti-community based on materialism and conformity.

I imagine the laser undergoes significant decoherence in practice.

I loved being able to build a spy unit that was submersible.

Whether illegal immigration is a net gain for the American economy or not is such a complex subject that basing it off some anecdotal "homeless Mexicans" looking for manual labor post seems... ill-advised.

From the perspective of an employer the short-term gain of paying less for labor is attractive and a positive. For Americans who might be competing with "homeless Mexicans" it is likely a negative. And beyond these two simple perspectives lay more complex calculations of benefits and detriments.

Measuring the negatives against the positives requires far more data than a single anecdotal post about "homeless Mexicans." At least for me.

It's great when sanctimonious fools like Bork are hoist by their own petard.

I am in favor of the notion but it seems like revoking Prop 13 and rezoning the area over the objections of NIMBYists is just as likely to occur and probably prudent whatever else happens.